Warning! Javascript is used extensively on the City of Bethlehem Web site, but your browser has disabled Javascript or does not support it. You may have a better browsing experience if you can enable Javascript.

Language Translation Disclaimer

The City of Bethlehem uses an independent third party tool to provide automated language translation. As with any machine translation, the conversion is not context-sensitive and may not fully translate text into its intended meaning. Therefore, the City of Bethlehem does not guarantee the accuracy of the translated text and it should not be relied upon for anything other than informational purposes. We recommend that if you experience difficulty, or doubt the accuracy of the translation, you contact the proper City of Bethlehem department for the information you seek. Please note that some applications and or services may not work as expected when translated.

Council MInutes

December 22, 2009

BETHLEHEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING
10 East Church Street – Town Hall
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Tuesday, December 22, 2009 – 7:00 PM

1. INVOCATION
2. PLEDGE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL

President Donchez called the meeting to order. Reverend Doctor
Helen B. Cochrane, First Presbyterian Church of Bethlehem,
offered the invocation which was followed by the pledge to
the flag. Present were Jean Belinski, Karen Dolan, Joseph
F. Leeson, Jr., Gordon B. Mowrer, J. William Reynolds, J.
Michael Schweder, and Robert J. Donchez, 7.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The Minutes of December 1, 2009 were approved.

5. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (for public comment on Ordinances
and Resolutions to be voted on by Council this evening –
5 Minute Time Limit)

Amending Article 721 – Streets and Sidewalks –
Vendor Ordinance

Richard Szulborski, 669 Atlantic Street, a board member
of the Sun Inn Preservation Association, commented that although
the Sun Inn Board prefers no vendors it realizes that cannot
be done legally. Mr. Szulborski stated the Board supports
the Bill as amended by Mr. Schweder at the December 1, 2009
City Council Meeting. Mr. Szulborski enumerated that the Bill
as amended limits the vendors to commercial areas, uses existing
boards for the review process, and protects the rights of
the property owner by requiring their permission for a vendor
to use their sidewalk. Mr. Szulborski urged City Council to
support the Bill as amended.

Budget and Financial Matters

Dana Grubb, 2420 Henderson Place, discussed the definition
of the word honesty, and said the City’s financial status
is probably much worse than some may realize. Referring to
a question raised by a City Firefighter at a recent Finance
Committee meeting about why a new aerial fire ladder truck
was not put into service and rumors that the City had not
paid for it that were denied by the Administration, Mr. Grubb
advised he has heard many of the same rumors. Informing the
assembly that today he spoke with the chief financial officer
of the Glick Fire Equipment Company, Mr. Grubb said the equipment
has not been paid for, payment was due within 30 days, and
no training on the vehicle can take place. Questioning why
$500,000 due on the aerial cannot be paid and is being projected
to be paid in January or February 2010, Mr. Grubb pointed
out that there is $663,000 in the 2008 Non-Utility Capital
Budget for the equipment. Mr. Grubb recalled that last year
he questioned whether the Administration was borrowing cash
from bonds and notes to meet other expenses unrelated to capital
improvements and pointed out that City officials stated this
was not the case. Asking when City Council will hold the Administration
accountable, Mr. Grubb remarked that when Council goes along
it makes them complicit. Mr. Grubb asserted that mismanagement
is carrying Bethlehem into a fiscal downturn. He continued
on to say that Council is told that payments have been made
but have not been, that laws are broken, and public funds
spent without Council’s approval. Mr. Grubb expressed
his opinion that Council needs a consultant to advise on honesty,
integrity, and principles. Further stating that reportedly
the City is not able to accept delivery of an ambulance because
it cannot make payment from the 2008 Note although over $178,000
is budgeted, Mr. Grubb asked where is the cash from these
Notes that would allow the City to pay for the ambulance and
for the aerial. Mr. Grubb expressed his belief that the Administration
is further in the hole than Council realizes and has been
using cash from capital improvement financing instruments.
Mr. Grubb communicated that the 2010 Budget is not balanced
and plunges Bethlehem residents even further into a financial
abyss, and asserted that public safety may be compromised
due to delays in payment for the fire and ambulance equipment.
Mr. Grubb thought that Council should not support the 2010
Budget, should ask more questions about revenues, and make
cuts to protect the taxpayers.

President Donchez affirmed that he received a response from
the Fire Commissioner regarding the new aerial ladder and
it will be forwarded to Mr. Grubb and Mr. Meixell.

Host Fees

Antonio Simao, 1135 E. Third Street, recalled that at the
last meeting there was a discussion about the Host Fee revenues
that are supposed to be protected and given back to the taxpayers
and asked if that is correct.

President Donchez replied that the Members of Council voted
to endorse the Mayor’s recommendation last year that
the City’s Host Fee be used for public safety, infrastructure,
and to bring down debt, and by law the purpose of the Host
Fee revenues is not for tax relief. However, the casino revenue
money State-wide is used for tax relief for school property
tax.

Fire Salaries; Budget; Fire Stations

Terry Meixell, 56 E. Goepp Street, noted that he distributed
a letter to the Members of Council regarding an Act of May
31, 1933, Article 21 – Fire Bureau, that was updated
June 16, 1993, Section 2109 – Salary of Non-Union City
Fire Officers, and he read the law. Mr. Meixell expressed
his understanding is that they should be receiving a 6% raise
and he does not see it in the Budget, and said by passing
the Budget the laws of Pennsylvania are being broken. Mr.
Meixell, referring to the deletion of three additional Police
Officers that was approved at the Final Budget Meeting, said
the three Police Officers are needed and probably three more
Firefighters, Electricians, Maintenance Personnel, Mechanics,
and so on. Mr. Meixell remarked, however, with the Budget
and times as they are it cannot be afforded. Referring to
projects accomplished this year, Mr. Meixell asserted the
fact that three fire stations had half of their windows replaced
did not solve any heating issues. Mr. Meixell thought it would
have been better to take the money that was spent at the Golf
Course Clubhouse windows and provide better heating for the
Fire Stations. Continuing on to stress that none of the Fire
Stations have any emergency power generation, Mr. Meixell
said they have been put in the proposed budgets numerous times
but are one of the first things to be taken out.

Amending Article 721 – Streets and Sidewalks –
Vendor Ordinance

Ms. Torres, 730 Ontario Street, read a letter dated December
16, 2009 from Olga Negron, President of the Board of Directors
of the Community Action Development Corporation of Bethlehem,
that was addressed to Mayor Callahan and the Members of Council.
In the letter it was noted that not all business models seek
to obtain brick and mortar establishments, and vending may
be an important component of business ventures for some individuals.
Ms. Negron expressed in the letter that the amendment presented
by Mr. Schweder will offer increased opportunities for entrepreneurship
and is an improvement to the lottery system contained in the
initially proposed Ordinance. In the letter, several suggestions
were offered. Since the language of the Ordinance seems to
indicate that only property owners or lease holders can be
vendors, it would appear to preclude independent operators
and entrepreneurs from conducting business activity even with
the permission of property owners. The addition of one or
more business and economic development professionals to the
licensing committee was encouraged. Ms. Negron also raised
several questions in her letter including non-stationary vendors
and operational restrictions, relationship to other vehicles,
whether mobile vendors are permitted in residential areas
or limited to commercial districts, and whether mobile vendors
should be reviewed and approved by the same committee as stationary
vendors.

Tina Kowalski, merchant at Fourth and New Streets, recounted
that she and her husband lost their jobs in 1982 and decided
to go into business for themselves. They refinanced their
home and bought a condemned, foreclosed property at Fourth
and New Streets. At the same time, there were a dozen new
entrepreneurs in the area who formed the South Side Merchants
Association. In the mid 1980’s, the merchants petitioned
Mayor Marcincin to fix the broken street lights. In the 1980’s
and 1990’s they petitioned Mayor Smith for more Police
presence in the business district that later became Police
on bicycles and there were Police Substations, and they petitioned
for more garbage cans at intersections in the business district.
They formed a local crime watch program, got rid of motorcycle
gangs, drug addicts and dealers. In 2003, the merchants petitioned
Mayor Delgrosso’s office to stop LANTA bus shelters
from being placed at intersections in the South Side business
district. In 2009, the merchants petitioned Mayor Callahan
and City Council regarding not allowing push cart vendors
in the South Side Business District. Ms. Kowalski stressed
that 80 merchants signed the petitions opposing push cart
vending in both the South Side and the North Side Business
Districts, and Council has heard from at least four dozen
individuals opposing push cart vending in the Business Districts.
Ms. Kowalski highlighted the fact that the opposition is not
about the $1.50 hot dog being sold but about the nuisance
from the vendors all summer long, not respecting the merchants
or their property, blocking the right of way, taking up parking
spaces, and leaving trash. Ms. Kowalski asserted that the
South Side Business District does not have adequate parking
for vendors, or wide enough sidewalks to properly accommodate
push carts. Ms. Kowalski expressed that push cart vending
is not good for either of the two business districts, the
merchants do not want it and do not need it. Ms. Kowalski,
asking Council to please consider the merchants concerns,
communicated that Council’s support is needed and it
is all the merchants have. Ms. Kowalski pointed out that the
twelve original merchants of the South Side Merchants Association
are still in South Bethlehem operating their businesses and
very active in South Side affairs.

2010 Budget – Three Additional Police Officers

Stuart Bedics, Acting Police Commissioner, reading from
his memorandum dated December 22, 2009 that was provided to
the Members of Council, pointed out that the City enjoys the
benefits of having a Police Department that is proactive in
fighting crime, and the Police Officers address quality of
life issues on a routine if not daily basis, rather than being
reactive and merely just responding from call to call. This
philosophy has helped to make Bethlehem one of the safest
cities in Pennsylvania. Continued success is predicated on
having a police force large enough to maintain periods of
unobligated time for Officers to address these issues. Former
Police Commissioner Randall Miller had the foresight to have
an impact study conducted, completed by G. Patrick Gallagher,
before the opening of the Sands Casino that looked at the
staffing levels of the Police Department. The study noted
the goal should be to have two police officers for every 1,000
residents. Prior to the opening of the Sands Casino, the City
had 155 police officers or slightly above the recommended
average of two. Given the City’s population of about
72,000 Mr. Gallagher felt that in order to maintain the level
of service residents had become accustomed to the City needed
to account for the 16,000 daily average number of guests visiting
the Casino in order to ensure proper manning levels. Based
on that understanding, the manning numbers should be generated
based on a population of 88,000. Currently, the City maintains
a police force of 159 officers, and combined with the 12 State
Police Officers assigned to the Sands Casino, it still puts
the City slightly below the recommended manning number of
2.0, at 1 .91. Adding the three Police Officers in the Proposed
2010 Budget that would raise the number to 162 Officers puts
the City at 1.97 officers for every 1,000 residents. Mr. Gallagher
recommends that the City remain proactive in determining manning
requirements for the City. Emphasizing that it is hard to
argue with the success the City and its Police force has enjoyed
maintaining the level of service at the recommended average
of 2 officers for every 1,000 residents, Acting Commissioner
Bedics stated that is why he strongly urges the Members of
Council to reconsider adding the additional three police officers
to the 2010 Budget this year. With the addition of the three
officers proposed in the 2010 budget, the Police Department
will continue to move towards those acceptable staffing levels
and those numbers will ensure that the Police Department can
remain proactive and not fall to reactive status. This foresight
will put the City ahead of the curve, unlike other police
agencies that are constantly fighting to get back their streets
from crime. Acting Commissioner Bedics asked that Council
reconsider the decision made at the Final Budget Meeting last
week to remove the three additional Police Officer positions
from the 2010 Proposed Budget. Acting Commissioner Bedics
stressed that the City of Bethlehem Police Department needs
these Police Officers to continue the City’s commitment
to providing a safe environment for all to work and live.

Mary Pongracz, 321 W. Fourth Street, remarked that no one
has ever said they are against vendors per se but rather it
has been said they do not follow the rules. She asserted they
encroach upon the rights of property owners to determine who
may or may not be in front of their house. Ms. Pongracz commented
that in the Ordinance she preferred the term natural person
rather than the word person in view of franchises. Ms. Pongracz
noted there are things that she has said that were not followed
through. Ms. Pongracz took exception to the CADC communicating
that people are anti-economic development because they are
not in favor of vendors. Ms. Pongracz expressed that people
are in favor of equal opportunity for all merchants. Ms. Pongracz
questioned funding the Skate Park rather than three Police
Officers who will serve all the citizens of Bethlehem. Ms.
Pongracz commented that she wants the best for the City whether
for the regulation of vendors or for additional Police Officers.

Police Officer Positions

Eddie Rodriquez, 1845 Linden Street, stressed that the three
Police Officers should be added who are desperately needed,
particularly in view of all he has been saying, and added
that crime activity is increasing and moving to the North
and West sides. Mr. Rodriquez asked that Council please change
their decision to remove the three additional Police Officers
that he emphasized is the wrong move. Mr. Rodriquez pointed
out that criminals will challenge the statement that Bethlehem
is one of the safest cities. He highlighted the fact that
there is drug activity, auto theft, and burglaries.

Amending Article 721 – Streets and Sidewalks –
Vendor Ordinance

Kristin Minor, 933 Wyandotte Street, communicated that the
primary interest of business is their own gain but not that
of their communities. She said that guidelines should help
people get what they want, not hinder them. Ms. Minor stated
it is not wrong for a modest street vendor to use the streets
as a place for business, and it is wrong and not the place
for other businesses to say that it is. Ms. Minor expressed
that doing away with street vending all together is a simple-minded
decision imposed by the business world to better themselves
and only themselves. Ms. Minor thought that the idea of street
vending being a threat to other business and an easy way to
make a quick buck is a lie. Ms. Minor said street vending
is nothing more than an honest living, and by allowing street
recreation it contributes to not only a better business world
but a better community.

Skate Park

Stephen Antalics, 737 Ridge Street, advised that he has
observed skate boarders at Campus Square, and was impressed
by an individual’s perfection of physical ability. Mr.
Antalics thought that if skate boarders are not allowed to
engage in their sport it may develop into a negative attitude
and they may turn to negative and criminal activities that
in turn will demand Police attention. Mr. Antalics stressed
that the skate boarders need a studio for their sport that
is a form of self-perfection and a personal challenge rather
than competing with another person, it builds character, and
added they are very artistic.

Police Officer Positions

Bill Scheirer, 1890 Eaton Avenue, referring to the proposed
amendment of Mr. Reynolds, said he supports the increase for
the Police Salaries but opposes the decrease in Council’s
Professional Services. He commented on the challenge in reviewing
the City’s Budget, and thought that Council deserves
some part-time professional services devoted to the budget
in view of the fact that Council and the Administration have
different perspectives given the two separate branches of
government. Mr. Scheirer expressed his opinion that the idea
is to have enough to make sure that Bethlehem remains as safe
as it is and even safer would be better. Adding that if anything
one should err on the side of having too many Police Officers,
Mr. Scheirer said having three more Police Officers is very
conservative. Mr. Scheirer stated he would like to see Bethlehem
be an oasis of safety in the Lehigh Valley.

Amending Article 721 – Streets and Sidewalks –
Vendor Ordinance

Dale Schaffer, owner of Elysian Fields Specialty Florals,
36 W. Broad Street, stating he is opposed to the street cart
vendors, noted they cannot be prevented from coming into the
City, but the vendors can be regulated. Mr. Schaffer, stressing
that business owners are not greedy, highlighted the fact
that they employ countless numbers of people throughout the
year, pay wages, taxes, help to better the City, and bring
clients to the City. He commented that vendors can get a permit
for less than the employees of a business pay for a parking
space in the parking garage. Mr. Schaffer observed that if
the vendor in question had followed the rules then the present
situation would not be faced. Mr. Schaffer questioned why
it would be correct in any City to select where vending carts
are placed without the permission of the business or building
owner. Mr. Schaffer explained that he sent a clarification
letter to the Morning Call commending Mr. Schweder for his
proposal to have stronger regulation of vendors. Mr. Schaffer
advised that business owners are not saying they do not want
vendors but they do want a say in where they can go rather
than being arbitrarily told that a street vendor has to be
in a certain block. Stating that he did not receive a letter
about the proposal although he is across the street from a
merchant who did, Mr. Schaffer pointed out it will affect
him if there is to be a flower cart in the area where there
are seven reputable flower shops within a one mile radius
of the area and they were not informed. Mr. Schaffer asked
the Members of Council to strongly consider Mr. Schweder’s
proposal, regulate the vendors, and not allow them to come
into the City for minimal fees and ruin the appearance of
the downtown district. Mr. Schaffer stressed that the businesses
work very hard to make this a very appealing place for clients.

Mrs. Belinski stated she would like to bring up something
that Council learned about recently during the Proposed 2010
Budget Hearings that has been deeply troubling to her that
has to do with the multiple violations of City Ordinances
by the Administration. Mrs. Belinski recounted that when the
violations of the City Ordinances were disclosed, the reaction
of people in the room ranged from amusement to indifference.
Mrs. Belinski stressed that it really bothers her that people
in the Administration violate laws. The excuse given was that
they did not know about the City laws. Mrs. Belinski pointed
out that no one is above the law. Mrs. Belinski continued
on to say that at the Third Budget Hearing on December 2,
2009 Mr. Leeson asked the Administration where the extra money
was deposited from the casino Host Fees that was the money
that came in over and above what was budgeted and authorized
by City Council for spending in the 2009 Budget. Council was
then told that the amount of extra revenue that came in over
and above what was budgeted was $330,000 and the exact figure
was $335,643. Mr. Leeson asked whether it had been deposited
and reserved as required by law. The Business Administrator
indicated that all the money had already been spent. Mr. Reichard,
Business Administrator, sent a follow up memorandum indicating
that the gaming monies were received on October 19, 2009 and
then completely spent on November 6, 2009 only 19 days later.
Mrs. Belinski highlighted the fact that City Council was not
briefed about this, was not told about this, and was not asked
for approval to do this. Mrs. Belinski noted that on September
3, 2008 City Council passed an Ordinance that states no transfers
of unappropriated funds shall be made from the gaming local
share account without prior notice to and approval of City
Council, and stated the Mayor's signature is on this law that
was violated. The justification given for violation of this
City law was that they did not know about the law. Mrs. Belinski
remarked that she finds it hard to believe that no one in
the Administration — the Mayor, the Business Administrator,
the City Solicitors — knows about City laws. Mrs. Belinski
noted that the City Council meeting minutes indicate that
this law was repeatedly mentioned and discussed at six different
City Council meetings by either Chuck Nyul, Bob Pfenning or
Dana Grubb on September 2, 2008, November 18, 2008, June 2,
2009, July 7, 2009 and September 15, 2009. It was also discussed
at the City Council meeting on October 6, 2009 only seven
days before the extra casino revenue was received. In fact,
seven days before the revenue was received, Mr. Pfenning spoke
to City Council on October 6, 2009 and the City Council minutes
note that Mr. Pfenning stated that City Council will now hopefully
be approving from the Administration the request to spend
$335,643.10 more than budgeted. Mrs. Belinski affirmed that
City Council President Robert Donchez wrote a memo to the
Administration concerning their excuse regarding not knowing
about the law, and said respectfully that he wished to comment
that he found this response hard to accept. Mrs. Belinski
expressed her agreement with President Donchez.

Mrs. Belinski turned to the next Ordinance violation by the
Administration concerning an Ordinance passed by City Council
on May 1, 2007 stating that no transfers of funds from the
treasurer's escrow account shall be made to the general fund
operating budget without prior notice to and approval of City
Council. Mrs. Belinski stressed that this Ordinance was also
signed by the Mayor. In the 2009 General Fund Budget, City
Council authorized borrowing of up to $1.8 million from the
Treasurer’s Escrow Account. Mrs. Belinski advised that
Council has learned that the Administration did the following
borrowing and transfer of funds from the Treasurer’s
Escrow Account: (1) On July 23, 2009 $1,000,000 was borrowed;
(2) On August 19, 2009 $800,000 was borrowed at which point
the maximum amount authorized by City Council was reached;
(3) On October 26, 2009 $2,000,000 was borrowed that was above
the amount of $1,800,000 authorized by Ordinance in the 2009
General Fund Budget. Mrs. Belinski related that the Administration
responded that it had run out of cash, it had no money and
the unpaid bills had to be paid. Mrs. Belinski noted she does
not question that the City ran out of money and the bills
had to be paid. Rather, what she questions is why City Council
was not notified and its approval sought as required by law
to authorize the borrowing, transfer, and expenditure of these
funds. Mrs. Belinski affirmed that City Council meets twice
a month and holds many Committee meetings in between, and
yet was never told. Mrs. Belinski stressed that she thinks
it is a serious matter when the Administration violates City
Ordinances. Mrs. Belinski stated she does not think this should
be overlooked, or laughed at. Mrs. Belinski asked Christopher
Spadoni, City Council Solicitor, to review this matter and
offer his opinion by January 19, 2010 concerning what Council’s
alternatives are as a result of these violations.

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 11, 2009 from Jeffrey
A. Andrews, Superintendent of Water Supply and Treatment,
to which was attached a proposed amendment to Article 911
– Water Regulations, in Section 911.09 - Fire Service,
pertaining to Fire Flow Tests.

President Donchez inquired whether the Public Works Committee
would like to review the matter. Chairwoman Dolan affirmed
that the Ordinance can be placed on the January 4, 2010 Council
Agenda for action.

B. Director of Public Works – Resolution for Plan Revision
for New Land Development – Sewage Facilities Planning
Module – Eaton Pointe Professional Building

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 11, 2009 from
Michael Alkhal, Director of Public Works, to which was attached
a proposed Resolution for Plan Revision for New Land Development
for the Eaton Pointe Professional Building, as required by
the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. The
proposed development is a 10,240 square foot office building
located at the northwest corner of Schoenersville Road and
Eaton Avenue. Because the project proposes a private pump
station, a full Sewage Facilities Planning Module is required.

President Donchez stated that the Resolution can be placed
on the January 4, 2010 Agenda.

C. Planning Bureau – Preservation Planning Initiative

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 15, 2009 from
Christine Bartleson, Community Planner, Bureau of Planning,
requesting assignment of a City Council Member to the Task
Force that will guide and inform the process of finalizing
contracts that will enable the Department of Community and
Economic Development to begin Preservation Planning. This
is in conjunction with the $30,000 Pennsylvania Historic Museum
Commission grant that the City will be matching with CDBG
funds.

President Donchez affirmed that a representative from Council
will be named in January 2010.

D. City Solicitor – Use Permit Agreement for Public
Property – American Association of University Women,
Bethlehem Branch – 2010 Book Fair

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 15, 2009 from
John F. Spirk, Jr., Esq., City Solicitor, to which was a attached
a proposed Resolution and Use Permit Agreement between the
City and the American Association of University Women, Bethlehem
Branch, for use of the Memorial Pool Building for the time
period March 15, 2010 to April 26, 2010 for the 2010 Book
Fair, according to the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

President Donchez stated that the Resolution will be placed
on the January 4, 2010 Council Agenda.

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 4, 2009 from
John F. Spirk, Jr., Esq., City Solicitor, to which was attached
a proposed Resolution and Site Agreement between the City
and TowerOne Bethlehem 001, LLC, for the purpose of erecting
and maintaining improvements, personal property and facilities
necessary to operate a cellular communications system to be
located at the North Central Fire Station at High Street,
according to the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

President Donchez referred the matter to the Parks and Public
Property Committee.

F. City Solicitor – Municipal Records Retention Resolution

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 17, 2009 from
John F. Spirk, Jr., Esq., City Solicitor, to which was attached
a proposed Resolution that identifies the updated retention
schedule and Manual that the City will follow as revised by
the Local Government Records Committee approved on December
16, 2008.

President Donchez stated that the Resolution will be placed
on the January 4, 2010 Council Agenda.

G. City Solicitor –Records Destruction Resolution

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 17, 2009 from
John F. Spirk, Jr., Esq., City Solicitor, requesting a Resolution
for the destruction of records from the Health Bureau. The
Law Bureau reviewed the Municipal Records Retention Act and
the records fall within categories where destruction is permitted.

President Donchez stated that the Resolution will be placed
on the January 4, 2010 Council Agenda.

The Clerk read a memorandum dated December 11, 2009 from
Darlene L. Heller, Director of Planning and Zoning, advising
that the Planning Commission, at their December 10, 2009 meeting,
voted unanimously to recommend the dedication of Riverside
Drive as depicted on the St. Luke’s Riverside Drive
Roadway Plan, subject to final review by the City.

President Donchez referred the matter to the Public Works
Committee.

8. REPORTS

A. President of Council

1. Councilmanic Appointment – Allison Perrucci –
Library Board

President Donchez appointed Allison Perrucci to membership
on the Library Board effective until January 2013. Mr. Reynolds
and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 2009-209 to confirm
the appointment.

President Donchez reappointed Linda C. Robertson to membership
on the Library Board effective until January 2013. Mr. Reynolds
and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution 2009-211 to confirm
the appointment.

Mr. Reynolds commented that, as he said during the Proposed
2010 Budget Hearings, the Library in the coming years could
potentially face more difficult years than in the past. Mr.
Reynolds thought it would be wise to be more involved in what
is occurring at the Library.

President Donchez reappointed LauraLynne Burtner to membership
on the Environmental Advisory Council effective until January
2013. Ms. Dolan and Mr. Reynolds sponsored Resolution 2009-213
to confirm the appointment. The Resolution passed.

President Donchez reappointed R. Michael Topping to membership
on the Environmental Advisory Council effective until January
2013. Ms. Dolan and Mr. Reynolds sponsored Resolution 2009-214
to confirm the appointment.

President Donchez reappointed George Yasko to membership
on the Environmental Advisory Council effective until January
2013. Ms. Dolan and Mr. Reynolds sponsored Resolution 2009-215
to confirm the appointment.

President Donchez, stating that the City has an excellent
team, said there is no question that Bethlehem will continue
to move forward with great leadership in the Police Department,
and congratulated Mr. Bedics.

Chairman Leeson presented an oral report of the Committee’s
meeting on December 15, 2009 at 6:30 PM in Town Hall, as follows.
The Committee was presented with revised debt service schedules,
as had been requested by Chairman Leeson at the December 9,
2009 Finance Committee meeting, on the General Obligation
Notes (line of credit) Series A and B of 2010 for Water and
Sewer Systems Infrastructure Investment to start repaying
principal of some amount after the first twelve months, and
some repayment of principal over the five years before 2014;
and, a level debt service schedule for the Refinancing of
the Bethlehem Authority’s 1998 Guaranteed Water Revenue
Bonds, in view of the approximate $700,000 swing over time
for the water portion. The revised payment schedules for the
General Obligation Notes reflected that they would be unable
to be supported given the cash flow and revenue to the system.
In a memorandum dated December 22, 2009 to the Finance Committee,
the Bethlehem Authority reported on their actions taken at
their meeting on December 10, 2009 and stated that they strongly
support the plan that was presented to the Finance Committee
on December 9, 2009. No further action was taken by the Committee.
The General Obligation Notes (line of credit) Series A and
B of 2010 for Water and Sewer Systems Infrastructure Investment,
and the Refinancing of the Bethlehem Authority’s 1998
Guaranteed Water Revenue Bonds are to be listed on the City
Council Agenda for the December 22, 2009 Meeting on Final
Reading under the debt service schedules as presented at the
December 9, 2009 Finance Committee meeting.

That the following sections which read as follows:
SECTION 2. Appropriations in the sum of Seventy-One Million,
Six Hundred Twenty Thousand ($71,620,000) Dollars are hereby
made from the General Fund as follows:

Ms. Dolan moved to request that an explanation be provided
on the upgrades in the Parks and Public Property Department
for Building Maintenance and Pool Technician and in the Golf
Course for Golf Course Lead Technician. Mr. Leeson seconded
the motion. Voting AYE: Mrs. Belinski, Ms. Dolan, Mr. Leeson,
Mr. Mowrer, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Schweder, and Mr. Donchez, 7.
The motion passed.

Ms. Dolan noted there is some misunderstanding regarding
the upgrades and the current Union contract, and why it was
necessary to create new positions and raising salaries as
opposed to an employee remaining at that level and title.

Ralph Carp, Director of Parks and Public Property, advised
there are needs in both Bureaus to provide greater leadership,
mentoring and support to the general work group. Continuing
on to say there are individuals in the work groups who have
exceptional skills, Mr. Carp explained he would like to capitalize
on their skill sets, place them in the positions, acknowledge
and properly compensate them. In addition, Mr. Carp stated
he would like to have the individuals mentor others in the
work group to strengthen it.

In further response to Ms. Dolan, Mr. Carp affirmed that
a detailed description of the individual jobs will be written.
Mr. Carp informed Ms. Dolan that he is interested in the positions
being correctly identified rather than vague in the description
of responsibilities.

Ms. Dolan stated that she felt Council should have the benefit
of the explanation in case the issue comes up in the future.

Mrs. Belinski, advising she received calls about the matter,
noted some of the Union members are very upset that the upgrades
are arbitrarily being given and they were not consulted.

Ms. Dolan, commenting it is her understanding it has been
done for a long time, said there is the possibility that in
the future the contract could be negotiated differently.

Mrs. Belinski, expressing she wonders why if this has been
done that she received calls from the Union President and
Vice President who were very upset about it, stated this should
have been negotiated through the Union but the Union was bypassed.

Mr. Reynolds stated that he would like to propose the following
Amendment to place back into the General Fund Budget the addition
of two Police Officers to be hired in July 2010. Amendment
1 to Bill No. 25 – 2009 placed into the Unforeseen Contingency
Account the funding for the hiring of three additional Police
Officers in the 2010 General Fund Budget that had originally
been proposed.

President Donchez pointed out that the motion must be made
by a Member of Council who voted in the majority to delete
the hiring of three additional Police Officers in the 2010
General Fund Budget that had originally been proposed.

Ms. Dolan made the motion. Mr. Reynolds seconded the motion.

Mr. Reynolds recounted that at the Final Budget Meeting
on December 15, 2009 by a vote of five to two the funding
for three additional Police Officer positions was placed into
the Unforeseen Contingency Account. In addition, the amount
of $60,000 was placed into City Council’s Professional
Services Account with the intent of hiring a budget analyst.
Mr. Reynolds explained that under Amendment 2 the amount of
$45,308 is being removed from the $60,000 amount in City Council’s
Professional Services Account and the $45,308 is placed into
Police Department – Salaries for the hiring of two additional
Police Officers in July 2010; and, $19,482 is being removed
from the Unforeseen Contingency Account and is placed into
the Medical Insurance Account for the benefits costs for the
two Police Officers. Mr. Reynolds calculated that placing
$60,000 into City Council’s Professional Services Account
raised City Council’s Budget by approximately 31% with
which he personally disagreed in view of the fact that three
Police Officers positions were being placed into Unforeseen
Contingency. Mr. Reynolds explained that adding two Police
Officers instead of three Police Officers is a compromise.
Mr. Reynolds stated that safety should not be taken for granted
and Police Officers are needed. Mr. Reynolds continued on
to say that at the various Block Watch meetings citizens constantly
tell City officials that more Police are needed. Commenting
that if the development were not going on now then the City
might be able to live with the current Police staffing levels,
Mr. Reynolds thought that adding Police Officers is the right
thing to do. He communicated that with the current economic
problems it does not send the right message to raise Council’s
Budget but yet not fulfill one of the most basic municipal
services of providing safety for the residents. Mr. Reynolds
related that a citizen asked him why would Council vote to
increase its budget and not want to increase the Police force.
Mr. Reynolds expressed that funding from the $60,000 would
be better spent on two Police Officers than on Council’s
own budget.

Ms. Dolan asked if $45,308 would cover the cost of two Police
Officers.

Dennis Reichard, Business Administrator, replied yes with
two Police Officers starting July 2010.

Ms. Dolan recalled that the vote taken at the Final Budget
Meeting took the cost of salaries for three Police Officers
and placed it into the Unforeseen Contingency Account so that
it gave time until July 2010 to see if those funds would possibly
be needed because of shortfalls or decline in revenues, but
with the hope that would not be the case. It also left the
flexibility to hire three Police Officers as originally contained
in the Proposed 2010 Budget. Ms. Dolan questioned if it is
impractical to place the money into the Unforeseen Contingency
Account in terms of moving forward.

Mr. Reichard affirmed that Council approval is needed in
order to move money out of the Unforeseen Contingency Account.
Confirming that in June 2010 a request could be made to City
Council to transfer funds out of the Unforeseen Contingency
Account for hiring Police Officers, Mr. Reichard noted, however,
that Police Commissioner Bedics explained earlier why he wanted
the Police Officers to be hired.

Ms. Dolan thought the understanding was to place the funds
into the Unforeseen Contingency Account for consideration
to be used for Police Officers if needed.

Mr. Leeson explained that, because crime is going down in
the City and data produced suggested that the biggest increase
with respect to the Casino involved people who were sick as
opposed to crimes, advised since everyone is in favor of public
safety it was his suggestion to continue to monitor the crime
statistics. If crime starts to go up then the money is there
to take action. Mr. Leeson suggested that if the Administration
had identified a true need situation they would have requested
that the three Police Officers be hired effective January
1, 2010. Mr. Leeson recounted that last week he quoted the
statistics that the City reports to the FBI.

Ms. Dolan communicated her thought that the vote taken at
the Final Budget Meeting was a compromise because it satisfied
the need to have a cushion if absolutely needed and also gave
the opportunity to look at the needs at mid-year and move
forward with placing money where it needs to go. Ms. Dolan,
highlighting the fact that no Police Officer positions are
being cut, pointed out the question is whether three more
Police Officers are needed in July 2010. She continued on
to say there is every ability to make a decision to hire Police
Officers at any point with the placement of the monies in
the Unforeseen Contingency Account, and attention is being
given to public safety.

President Donchez affirmed that the action taken at the
Final Budget Meeting was to place into the Unforeseen Contingency
Account the amount estimated at $97,186 associated with the
deletion of three Police Officers from the Police Department
Budget, with the note that expenditure of any of the savings
shall not be made without prior approval of City Council.

Ms. Dolan expressed it is safer to put the money into Unforeseen
Contingency than taking it out of Council’s Professional
Services.

Mr. Reynolds asked the benefit of having the money for Police
salaries now rather than waiting until July.

Police Commissioner Bedics, querying if the crime benchmark
would be waiting until there is another homicide or ten more
robberies, for example, advised that the process of hiring
a Police Officer takes almost six months including background
investigations and polygraphs. Police Commissioner Bedics
further advised that by March 2010 a decision would be necessary
in order for a newly hired Police Officer to attend the Police
Academy for training that starts in August.

While expressing his personal belief that the Police Officers
are needed now, Mr. Reynolds pointed out that, given the process,
placing the money into the Police Salaries Account would prevent
a delay in putting Police Officers on the street.

Mr. Schweder, commenting this was disposed of already, observed
if the amendment sponsored by Mr. Reynolds passed there would
be funding for five Police Officers. Mr. Schweder, affirming
that he proposed the amendment at the Final Budget Meeting
for a financial consultant or budget analyst type position
for City Council, confirmed he will not be on Council next
year and a majority of those who will be Members of Council
next year have said they do not want to have it. Mr. Schweder
recalled that several years ago funding was also taken out
of the Proposed Budget and then later was put back in. Mr.
Schweder thought the debate should probably end now and approve
Amendment 2.

Mr. Mowrer stated that he supports Mr. Leeson’s proposal
that passed at the Final Budget Meeting.

Attorney Spadoni affirmed to President Donchez that four
votes are needed to adopt Amendment 2.

President Donchez, confirming that he supported the funding
for the three Police Officers, pointed out that Mr. Reynold’s
proposal would leave $17,000 in City Council’s Professional
Services Account for financial advice that he said is important.
President Donchez, while noting he was not in favor of a full
time position, thought it is very important that City Council
have an allocation when needed to obtain independent financial
advice, just as Council has its own independent Solicitor.
President Donchez communicated it has nothing to do with lack
of trust but rather separation of powers between the Executive
and Legislative branches of City government. President Donchez
commented that when dealing with financial matters such as
bond issues City Council would be served well with obtaining
a financial analyst’s review and opinion. President
Donchez restated, as he had explained at the Final Budget
Meeting, that it is important to hire the Police Officers
which would take the total to 162 Police Officers. While expressing
his belief that the number of Police Officers should be 170,
President Donchez stated that the specialty units need more
manpower. Communicating it has been very fortunate that there
has not been a spike in crime with the casino, President Donchez
observed there are spikes in other areas.

Mr. Mowrer, affirming he is not against hiring Police Officers,
remarked he does not think if Council votes against this they
are saying that. Mr. Mowrer highlighted the fact that it has
been made clear that the money is there if needed. Mr. Mowrer,
saying the need is if crime does start to increase, stated
if that is the case and support is needed he will be one of
the first in line. However, Mr. Mowrer communicated at this
time this is not quite right, as crime has been going down.
Mr. Mowrer, observing that Firefighters are needed too, said
he will vote against the amendment.

Ms. Dolan, noting that extensive detail was presented at
the Finance Committee meeting, commented she has a greater
understanding of the need for the projects and the savings
that will be achieved. Ms. Dolan, pointing out that the long
term goal is to make extremely important improvements to the
infrastructure, commented that she supports the Bill.

Mr. Leeson, recounting that during the Budget Hearings he
had expressed his comments and concerns about the different
Budgets on which Council is voting tonight, advised he would
like to address the borrowing for the Water and Sewer Systems.
Confirming there is no question that the repairs have to be
done, Mr. Leeson said one of the things he finds most objectionable
is that the most expensive way is being chosen to do it. Highlighting
the fact that the Line of Credit borrowing for the Water System
improvements on which City Council just voted is an interest
only loan, Mr. Leeson stated he cannot accept that, and some
of the reasons he is opposing the Bills tonight are from a
fiscal perspective.

The Clerk read Bill No. 36 – 2009 – Line of
Credit – Sewer Capital and Water Capital Funds, on Final
Reading.

Mr. Schweder stated this is a number of Budgets in a row
that he did not think were balanced or accurate. Mr. Schweder
denoted that, with the adoption of the Line of Credit, the
debt of the City is now just under $300,000,000 again.

Ms. Dolan inquired whether the recitals she had requested
to be added to the Ordinance were legally binding. Ms. Dolan
explained the intent was that future Councils and the Administration
pledge themselves to deal with the financing rather than suddenly
having a large debt payment to be made. Ms. Dolan observed
that if future Councils and the Administration do what is
believed needs to be done this actually is a less expensive
approach. Remarking that a very good rate was obtained on
the borrowing, Ms. Dolan stated it is a bridge to get the
City to a point where it can be rolled into bond debt.

Attorney Kevin Reid, of King, Spry, Bond Counsel, advised
that with respect to the recital requested by Ms. Dolan it
is found on the top of page 4 of the amended Ordinance that
was distributed to the Members of Council. Attorney Reid added
it indicates the intention that is not binding.

Ms. Dolan expressed her belief that an Ordinance, especially
when it inspires so much passion among citizens, should take
as long as it needs to get it right. Ms. Dolan, noting that
different legal opinions have been forwarded, stated she will
reference the opinions presented by Council Attorney Spadoni.
Ms. Dolan commented that if Council votes in favor of the
Bill tonight the terms of the professional contract with the
Historic Preservation Officer will be changed, and the changes
will be handed over to the committee. Any additional hours
required of the Historic Preservation Officer will be uncompensated.
In addition, any costs incurred by the committee such as legal
advertising would come from City Council’s budget. Ms.
Dolan emphasized that all of the versions of the Ordinance
were designed to regulate vendors. Highlighting the fact that
the big difference is who is going to handle the regulations,
Ms. Dolan stressed that powers not normally granted would
be given to citizen committees, and at the very end City Council
would say yes or no. Turning to the response from John F.
Spirk, Jr., Esq., City Solicitor, Ms. Dolan noted Attorney
Spirk believes that since the historic boards have publicly
stated they oppose all vendors one could perceive a vendor
whose license has been revoked making an argument to court
that the agency lacked impartiality and acted arbitrarily
and capriciously, and added that is her worry. Ms. Dolan communicated
that City Council will have to make sure that the vendors
are in line. Ms. Dolan, expressing she thinks the Ordinance
needs more work and needs to be looked at, stated the Ordinance
as amended never went to Committee.

Pointing out she does not see the rush, Ms. Dolan said she
would make a motion that the Ordinance not be acted on tonight,
that it be tabled, and sent back to Committee for further
evaluation. There was no second to the motion, and the motion
died.

Amendment to Bill No. 37 – 2009

Mr. Leeson affirmed that at his request Attorney Spadoni
prepared an amendment addressing the review of outdoor dining
furniture in the Historic District, moved that the amendment
be considered. Mrs. Belinski seconded the motion. The Amendment
follows:

That Section 721.06, B, which reads as follows:

B. Restaurateurs may have outdoor dining that occupy the
public right-of-way adjoining its property. For all outdoor
dining that occupies the public right-of-way a permit must
be obtained for $10.00 from the Department of Public works
subject to the rules and regulations issued by the Department.
A minimum of five (5) feet of clear walkway must be maintained
at all times on the sidewalk. There can be no outdoor dining
during Municipal Sponsored or Sanctioned Events, unless the
Department of Public works permits said activity.

Shall be amended to read as follows:

B. Restaurateurs may have outdoor dining that occupy the
public right-of-way adjoining its property. For all outdoor
dining that occupies the public right-of-way a permit must
be obtained for $10.00 from the Department of Public works
subject to the rules and regulations issued by the Department.
A minimum of five (5) feet of clear walkway must be maintained
at all times on the sidewalk. There can be no outdoor dining
during Municipal Sponsored or Sanctioned Events, unless the
Department of Public works permits said activity. For locations
of outdoor dining within any historic district as established
by the City of Bethlehem, the furnishings and equipment, if
any, for outdoor dining shall be subject to review by the
Committee and City Council as set forth in Section 721.05.

Ms. Dolan, while commenting she is in favor of finding ways
to regulate the outdoor dining furniture, stressed that the
amendment would give the power to the historic review boards
and they do not have that power under Pennsylvania statute
since their power is limited to structures as opposed to such
matters as furniture. Ms. Dolan asked Mr. Schweder if that
is correct.

Mr. Schweder responded that the authority that the committee
gains is through the Ordinance and not through State authority.
Mr. Schweder, noting that the committee has no authority to
implement anything, said it is advisory the same as other
boards are to City Council and City Council ultimately makes
the decision.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BETHLEHEM, LEHIGH
AND NORTHAMPTON COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA, DETERMINING TO
INCUR DEBT IN THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $11,600,000
IN CONNECTION WITH THE REFUNDING BY BETHLEHEM AUTHORITY
(THE “AUTHORITY”) OF CERTAIN LEASE RENTAL DEBT
HERETOFORE
LAWFULLY INCURRED BY THE AUTHORITY AS EVIDENCED BY THE
AUTHORITY’S OUTSTANDING CURRENT INTEREST BONDS
DESIGNATED AS GUARANTEED WATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES OF
1998 (THE “1998 BONDS”); DETERMINING THAT SUCH
DEBT SHALL BE
INCURRED AS LEASE RENTAL DEBT TO BE EVIDENCED BY A SERIES
OF GUARANTEED WATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES OF 2010, TO BE
AUTHORIZED AND TO BE ISSUED BY THE AUTHORITY; BRIEFLY
DESCRIBING THE PROJECT REFINANCED BY THE 1998 BONDS AND
SPECIFYING THE REMAINING USEFUL LIFE OF SAID PROJECT;
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR, THE PRESIDENT OF THE
COUNCIL, THE CITY CONTROLLER, THE CITY TREASURER, THE
BUSINESS ADMINISTRATOR OR THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY TO
PREPARE, VERIFY AND FILE, AS APPLICABLE, THE DEBT STATEMENT
AND OTHER APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT UNIT DEBT ACT, 53 PA. C.S. § 8001 ET SEQ.,
AS
AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED, AND, UPON RECEIPT OF APPROVAL
OF THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, TO EXECUTE, ATTEST, ACKNOWLEDGE
AND DELIVER, AS APPROPRIATE, (I) A SEVENTH SUPPLEMENTAL
CONTRACT AND LEASE, BETWEEN THE AUTHORITY, AS LESSOR,
AND THE CITY, AS LESSEE, SUPPLEMENTING A CONTRACT AND
LEASE, DATED AS OF JANUARY 1, 1992, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED
AND SUPPLEMENTED, BETWEEN SAID AUTHORITY, AS LESSOR, AND
THE CITY, AS LESSEE, AND (II) A GUARANTY AGREEMENT WITH
RESPECT TO AFORESAID GUARANTEED WATER REVENUE BONDS,
SERIES OF 2010; APPROVING THE FORMS OF SAID SEVENTH
SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT AND LEASE AND SAID GUARANTY
AGREEMENT; CONSENTING TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF SAID SEVENTH
SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT AND LEASE BY THE AUTHORITY, AS
SECURITY, TO THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, AS TRUSTEE
UNDER A TRUST INDENTURE, DATED AS OF JANUARY 1, 1992, AS
HERETOFORE SUPPLEMENTED AND AMENDED, AND AS FURTHER
SUPPLEMENTED AND AMENDED BY A FIFTH SUPPLEMENTAL TRUST
INDENTURE, AND AUTHORIZING DELIVERY OF SAID GUARANTY
AGREEMENT TO SAID TRUSTEE; SPECIFYING THE MAXIMUM LEASE
RENTALS TO BE PAID BY THE CITY PURSUANT TO SAID SEVENTH
SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT AND LEASE AND THE SOURCE OF
PAYMENT OF SUCH LEASE RENTALS; GUARANTEEING PAYMENT OF
THE PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST ON THE AFORESAID
GUARANTEED WATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES OF 2010 AND
MAKING CERTAIN COVENANTS WITH RESPECT THERETO;
SPECIFYING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF THE GUARANTY
OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY PURSUANT TO SUCH GUARANTY
AGREEMENT; PLEDGING THE FULL FAITH, CREDIT AND TAXING
POWER OF THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO THE GUARANTY
AGREEMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR PROPER OFFICERS OF THE CITY
TO TAKE ALL OTHER REQUIRED, NECESSARY OR DESIRABLE
RELATED ACTION IN CONNECTION WITH SAID PROJECT, SAID
SEVENTH SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT AND LEASE, AND SAID
GUARANTY AGREEMENT.

Mr. Leeson, recounting that when the refinancing was initially
presented the savings were projected at about $500,000, affirmed
that a memorandum was received today from Stephen Repasch,
Executive Director of the Bethlehem Authority, indicating
that now the savings are down to about $300,000. Continuing
on to note that the costs associated with the refinancing
is close to $500,000, Mr. Leeson said the structuring of the
repayment of the debt is substantially put off to the next
generation. There is a swing of roughly $700,000 in the debt
load that would start next year and go to the end of the bond
issue. Mr. Leeson observed this is the kind of financing engaged
in by the State and Federal governments that the City should
not follow. Pointing out that the City has always been very
responsible in terms of addressing its debt and having level
debt payment schedules, Mr. Leeson highlighted the fact that
this is a new type of debt schedule for the City with a very
expensive price tag, and with very little to show for it.
Mr. Leeson stated he will vote no on the Ordinance.

Ms. Dolan inquired whether a more detailed explanation can
be provided.

Stephen Repasch, Executive Director of the Bethlehem Authority,
affirming that the refinancing was discussed at Finance Committee
meetings, confirmed it was presented along with the Line of
Credit (Ordinance No. 2009-38 that was passed at this City
Council Meeting). Mr. Repasch continued on to affirm that
at the Finance Committee meeting Chairman Leeson had asked
for additional information about projecting savings over the
term of the refinancing. Mr. Repasch advised that it is the
refinancing of a Bond Issue to afford some savings that in
this case as of December 18, 2009 is approximately $300,000
that is slightly above a 3% savings threshold that had been
discussed at the Finance Committee meeting. In response to
President Donchez, Mayor Callahan noted that the savings will
go towards funding of the water projects.

Mrs. Belinski and Ms. Dolan sponsored Resolution No. 2009-220
that transferred $8,529 in the Sewer Fund Budget from the
Sewer General – Unforeseen Contingency Account to the
Sewer General – Professional Services Account to pay
outstanding invoices for the professional services received
in connection with the Four Mayors Letter to the DRBC.

Mr. Schweder asked what is the Four Mayors Letter. David
Brong, Director of Water and Sewer Resources, replied it was
written to the Delaware River Basin Commission to clarify
and provide justification for a proposed new rule that revolved
around nutrient removal of wastewater effluent. Advising that
all the discharges in the Lehigh Valley are potentially impacted,
Mr. Brong noted it is very costly to the communities and there
was a lobbying effort on the part of the communities as a
whole.

Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski sponsored Resolution No. 2009-221
that increased the Golf Fees for golf cart use at the Bethlehem
Municipal Golf Course as follows: Power Carts – 18 Holes
from $14.00 to $15.00 and 9 Holes from $8.00 to $8.50, effective
January 1, 2010.

Ms. Dolan and Mr. Reynolds sponsored Resolution No. 2009-222
that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to extend the
existing fire escape with a pressure treated lumber walkway
and railing across the roof and a steel stairway to the ground
at 146 East Market Street.

D. Certificate of Appropriateness – 54 East Church
Street

Ms. Dolan and Mr. Reynolds sponsored Resolution No. 2009-223
that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness for replacement
garage doors and new paint for the doors and trim (already
done) at 54 East Church Street.

E. Certificate of Appropriateness – 456 North New Street

Ms. Dolan and Mr. Reynolds sponsored Resolution No. 2009-224
that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to extend the
soffit, add trim and paint to match existing trim at 456 North
New Street.

F. Certificate of Appropriateness – 424 Center Street

Ms. Dolan and Mr. Reynolds sponsored Resolution No. 2009-225
that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the
slate roof and replace the gutters at 424 Center Street.

G. Certificate of Appropriateness – 404 Center Street

Ms. Dolan and Mr. Reynolds sponsored Resolution No. 2009-226
that granted a Certificate of Appropriateness to build a carport
at 404 Center Street.

Ms. Dolan and Mrs. Belinski to reschedule City Council’s
first Meeting in January from Tuesday, January 5, 2010 to
Monday, January 4, 2010 that is the date of the Reorganizational
Meeting of City Council.

Scott Lawrence, 39 E. Union Boulevard, advised he is the
Uncle of fallen Police Officer Mark Renninger. Mr. Lawrence
thanked the City, the Mayor, Police and Fire Commissioners
and their Departments and everyone involved that helped with
the funeral procession of Sergeant Renninger.

Text Messaging During Council Meeting

Thomas Carroll, 248 E. Union Boulevard, observed that a
Member of Council was texting during the Meeting this evening.

Preservation Planning Initiative

Dana Grubb, 2420 Henderson Place, urged that representatives
of Historic Bethlehem Partnership, South Bethlehem Historical
Society, Sun Inn Preservation and other organizations be included
in the Preservation Planning Initiative. Mr. Grubb suggested
that the historic organizations be notified about such types
of communications.

Outgoing Council Members – Joseph Leeson, Jr. and
J. Michael Schweder

Mr. Grubb noted that Mr. Leeson and Mr. Schweder and their
families have served the community very well over several
generations, and they both represent a very fine example of
that type of community commitment. Mr. Grubb, recalling that
Mr. Schweder rigorously questioned him during a past Budget
Hearing, communicated that is what Council Members should
do as they represent the people of the community to do the
best they can on their behalf. Mr. Grubb, further recalling
that he had worked closely with Mr. Leeson on development
of the TIF and the Bethlehem Works agreements, denoted his
respect for Mr. Leeson. Mr. Grubb thanked Mr. Leeson and Mr.
Schweder for their service, expressed the hope that they will
remain engaged in the community, and wished them the best
as they step down from City Council.

Carol Ann Krasley, Center Street, said she echoes Mr. Grubb’s
comments. Mrs. Krasley thanked Mr. Leeson for his years of
dedicated service, his interest in her part of the City, and
his integrity. Mrs. Krasley wished Mr. Leeson success in all
his future endeavors. Mrs. Krasley commented that Mr. Schweder
has exhibited a decorum and composure which is a standard
that is held high. Mrs. Krasley offered the sentiments of
Robert Pfenning to Mr. Leeson and Mr. Schweder of his appreciation
for their interest in the community and years of service,
and his wishes for their continued success.

Various Issues

Terry Meixell, 56 E. Goepp Street, stated that perhaps the
potholes can be filled in on West Lehigh Street. Mr. Meixell,
referring to Mrs. Belinski’s comments, remarked that
Council has not put the Administration to task. Mr. Meixell
communicated his thoughts that there was over $500,000 of
wasted money on the issue of the One Way Pairing proposal
in the vicinity of Five Points, and stressed that the residents
received nothing for the expenditure. Turning to the Fire
Department aerial ladder truck that is not paid for, Mr. Meixell
questioned is it legal to take bond money set aside for something
and spend it elsewhere. Mr. Meixell remarked that Council
needs to undertake an investigation more so than hiring a
budget analyst. Mr. Meixell expressed the hope that Members
of Council would ask the Fire Commissioner to address some
of the issues at the Fire Stations, especially the emergency
power, and added that radio communications are lost.

Outgoing Council Members – Joseph Leeson, Jr. and J.
Michael Schweder

Stephen Antalics, 737 Ridge Street, commented that numbers
one and three in evaluations are being lost to Council and
to the City. Mr. Antalics added it will be a hard task to
keep the high quality of City Council Members with the departure
of Mr. Schweder and Mr. Leeson. Mr. Antalics noted that Mr.
Leeson speaks with substance and Mr. Schweder has the acute
ability to see the issue and define it precisely.

Bill Scheirer, 1890 Eaton Avenue, stated that Mr. Leeson
and Mr. Schweder took the positions that they felt represented
the best interests of the City. Mr. Scheirer said they have
earned his respect and their presence will be missed in these
chambers.

Mary Pongracz, 321 W. Fourth Street, stated the City is losing
two good people on Council, and added they will be big shoes
to fill. Ms. Pongracz expressed that citizens have the right
to speak out.

Louise Valeriano, 3114 East Boulevard, thanked Mr. Schweder
and Mr. Leeson for their years of patience, experience, wisdom,
good judgment, balanced opinions, insight, and diplomacy.
Ms. Valeriano commented that their efforts were appreciated
by more people than they can ever know. Ms. Valeriano thanked
them for their years of service.

Various Issues

Eddie Rodriquez, 1845 Linden Street, thanked Mr. Schweder
and Mr. Leeson who he said are outstanding gentlemen who know
exactly what is needed for the City and said it is a shame
they are leaving Council. Mr. Rodriquez asserted the North
Side and South Side should be patrolled by Police Officers
on foot, and changes should be made in the areas of the Police
Substations. Mr. Rodriquez stressed there is a negative environment
that is moving into the City in the area of drugs that changes
the normal behavior of people to the point that they do not
care about anything, anybody, or the actions they take. Mr.
Rodriquez felt that Members of Council need to be more involved
with the citizens.